dirhash and dynamic memory allocation

[Doug Barton]

On 10/21/2011 20:04, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 07:16:27PM -0700, Doug Barton wrote:

>> Isn't that what vfs.ufs.dirhash_minsize is for? I think given that there
>> is a lot more memory in modern systems setting that higher by default is
>> probably a good idea. Or maybe I'm misunderstanding what that knob does?
> 
> I believe the function of that sysctl is different.  It's not the
> "minimum amount of dirhash memory to retain", it's:
> 
> $ sysctl -d vfs.ufs.dirhash_minsize
> vfs.ufs.dirhash_minsize: minimum directory size in bytes for which to use hashed lookup

Ah, silly me. I'm so used to 'sysctl -d' not working that I didn't even
try it this time. Thanks for setting me straight.

In that case I agree with the OP that a knob for minimum setting would
be desirable.


Doug

-- 

	Nothin' ever doesn't change, but nothin' changes much.
			-- OK Go

	Breadth of IT experience, and depth of knowledge in the DNS.
	Yours for the right price.  :)  http://SupersetSolutions.com/